Almost as bad as a non-existent succession plan is a succession plan even the successor knows nothing about. If Linus has a successor, that successor should be well aware, and already be a contributor to that succession plan. This isn't a will where you're pleasantly surprised your rich great-uncle left you his house on the French Riviera, this is a major project that is an integral component of thousands of technologies and workflows.

I didn't realize China even HAD any IP laws on the books over there? Do they specifically say "except when we copy IP from another country because that's OK", or do they just "selectively enforce" it that way?

Do they mean 25 conversations draws 0.75 % of the wattage the battery can provide?

Or 0.75% utilization of the processor?

They always seem like they're hiding something with bizarre units.

Does anybody have a detailed article or video about the challenges they faced?

This is seriously interesting material for microarchitecture nerds.

Please.

"Spy Chief says".

Anyone with two neurons to fire together knows whatever comes next is unreliable.

"Russian Hackers" ... "pro-Russian hackers".

Oh, JHFC, I wonder if Norway has any position on the peace-talk summit occurring today in Alaska.

These demons just want nonstop death, destruction, and MIC profits.

Stop giving them undue attention.

So why do so many Africans flee to Europe instead of other parts of Africa?

I get that the Sahara needs fixing since the Pyramids are broken (it recently had the largest lake in the world) but there's still lots of Africa to inhabit.

If only for the Vitamin D health it just doesn't make sense. Heck, I can get ghostly pale in Winter and 43N might still be too arctic for my health.

Are we just being sensational or is there another reason the summary doesn't mention why this is called a "Ghost Particle"?

Was this presumed to be a bug? Ghost in the Machine reference?

Unusual journalism rule breaking.

Yes it is different to the old cable bundles because with the old channels you could only watch what they were showing. Hence, to be sure that you had something to watch you needed to subscribe to multiple channels and they gradually showed you what you wanted spread over months or years.

Streaming services are different because once you subscribe you have access to everything they have. We generatlly subscribe to 1-2 services watch everything we want over a period of several months to a year and then switch to a different service and get a whole new library to watch. By the time we have cycled back to the original streaming service a couple of years have passed and they have new content and it has been a while since we watched the old too. You can't do that with cable channels because you do not control what they show.

Absolutely true but the truly stupid thing here is that, because Africa is on the equator, it's one of the continents that is least distorted by the mercator projection. Not only that but the default is to centre of the Greenwich meridian which puts Africa at the centre of the map. I'm finding it really hard to understand why using a map projection which distorts Africa the least and centres the entire map on it can be interpreted as "marginalising" Africa and making them feel less valued, indeed if anything it makes it look like the map makers cared more about Africa than anywhere else.

Actually I was thinking more of the Black Mirror epsiode where a medical AI implant replaces some critical brain functions after an accident and the poor woman starts speaking ads. It also shows the problem with adding ads to ChatGPT - how will anyone know whether the output was a true response from the AI or sponsored content from an advertizer?

For things like that I completely agree. Similarly the new bamboo spoons and forks are just as good as the plastic ones they replaced, if not better and stronger. However, try using a wooden knife or a paper straw and you'll see that there are limits. What I'd like to see is a more sensible approach where we replace the obvious things with non-plastic alternatives and work on finding solutions for the rest. However, in today's world it seems that either you have to support replacing everything immediately or nothing at all - the art of compromise seems to be lost.

While you can interpret the headline as saying that a new type of supernova has been detected as a black hole - since a black hole is a supernova remnant - this would be the pre-cursor supernova to the one actually observed and would have be a "regular" supernova, not a new type. However, since this supernova remnant (the Black Hole) did cause a star to explode this interpretation is still close to correct.

The other possible, and correct, interpretation is that a new type of supernova has been detected by the observation of a black hole causing a star to explode. There is no interpretation that is consistent with the act of detecting causing the explosion so no quantum interpretation is needed and even the alternative interpretation is technically not far from correct.

Detecting the supernova as a black hole did not cause it to explode.
The blackhole caused the star to explode. Detecting it doing it was probably not the cause. Unless you apply some weird quantum interpretation of measurement causing things to happen.

Possible, but I suspect that the effect will be quite small since it is X% times the reduction in life from under inflation. If also means that there is no longevity advantage at all for people who do maintain their tyres and I suspect that these are also the people who would be most likely to spend more money on new tyre technology. Indeed, I suspect this may be part of the problem: airless-tyres offer the most benefit to those least likely to care enough to spend more money on them.

...to welcome our AI-elected overlords?

I'm having a lot of trouble seeing where AI can be useful in an electoral system. The key feature of an election is that an average member of the public must be able to know that it was fair so they can accept the result. This means it not only has to be fair but also seen to be fair. AI algorithms are usually completely opaque even to experts in the field and their fairness depends entirely on their training which again is not something a member of the public can readily determine was fair.